So writes Gill Hornby in today’s Telegraph:
When the Ian Oakley scandal first broke, the official Conservative response was that it would be “inappropriate” to comment. But now he has actually pleaded guilty to a three-year sexist vendetta, and still the new, modern, forward-thinking, women-friendly party has failed to come up with even a line. Could we perhaps, future prime minister, hear your views?
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
What’s going on with party strategy? (Caron Lindsay)
We do have a two-tier system (Neil Hickman)
Observations of an Expat: NATO Irony (Tom Arms)
What really happened? (Simon Banks)
Why community politics matters (Mark Corner)
We do have a two-tier policing system but it is not what our homegrown racists think it is.
Lib Dems are reviewing policy and strategy says PoliticsHome
From Norman settlement to a civic square
Northern Ireland debates the future of its railways in 1957
"The old savage England": D.H. Lawrence visits the Stiperstones
Church Green video
Doing my bit at Whickham Church Green
Have a goat day tomorrow!
Pride inside instead
Ruth Bright 
Tom Bailey 
Alex Macfie 
William Wallace Alex Macfie 
18 Comments
Good call Mark. It was right not to comment while there was an investigation it is unforgivable for them to do an Ostrich impression now. Do not forget it was not only sexist but racist as well.
Good call Gill
And homophobic, Jay.
This man engaged in evil, criminal behaviour for which I fervently hope he will be justly punished. As soon as he was found out he immediately resigned from the Conservative Party, and if he hadn’t he would have been chucked out. What he was doing was not only against the Law, it was against the basic principles of the Conservative Party today, or at any time in the past for that matter. However, the reality is that every party attracts a certain number of bad people and the important thing is to note if their doings are broadly condoned or tolerated or if they are stamped on hard as soon as they are discovered. This man was in no doubt about the reaction of the Conservative Party so he walked before he got the boot.
What else is there to say? Do you seriously entertain the idea that this was in any way the way Conservatives are expected or encouraged to operate? If you do then you are deluded, if you don’t then you are trying to use this case to embarrass David Cameron. Put it this way, every time a LibDem goes bad is it Nick Clegg’s policy to make a public statement?
Thought not.
Yes, Steve. This was an extreme case, of course, but a lot of Tories are extremely unpleasant bullies. You have only to look at some web sies to see how they gang up on anybody who disagrees with them.
True Jenny, very true. The more you dig the worse it gets, doesn’t it ? so much for the friendly Tories.
Despite the throat-clearing exercise of his first sentence, Steve Horgan quickly manages to turn the argument round to have a go at the Lib Dems.
The quick answer, Steve, is that yes if a Lib Dem activist had been convicted of 75 criminal offences, all designed to influence the political climate in a marginal constituency, and which may well have changed the result of individual elections, then absolutely I would expect Nick Clegg to say something.
The problem is that we don’t know what the attitude of the national Conservative party or Watford Conservatives is to this episode, because they have not seen fit to make any comment.
Your speculation about their attitude may be right or not – but until they break silence we won’t know.
However, the more time goes on without any public statement, the suspicion will grow that the Conservatives are not unhappy at the distress and inconvenience caused to Liberal Democrats in Watford, the more so as they can now disown the perpetrator.
A clear, unequivocal statement on Tuesday, combined with the announcement of a proper investigation of the whole Oakley saga, would have averted any such suspicion.
“The quick answer, Steve, is that yes if a Lib Dem activist had been convicted of 75 criminal offences, all designed to influence the political climate in a marginal constituency… I would expect Nick Clegg to say something”
I’m not disagreeing with you but have we done this where Lib Dem councillors/activists have been convicted of vote fraud charges? We have tended to move quite slowly as regards expulsion.
Possibly – but if the facts are in dispute, there is a fair argument for letting people pursue the legal process to its conclusion before taking final action against them.
The facts here don’t seem to be disputed by anyone, so it is different. Cameron may (and certainly should) use the sentencing to break his silence and launch a full inquiry.
“As soon as he was found out he immediately resigned from the Conservative Party, and if he hadn’t he would have been chucked out.”
So according to one Conservative supporter the only thing Ian Oakley has done wrong is to get found out.
If David Cameron doesn’t make a clarification there is nothing more to add: Conservatives don’t believe the law applies to them.
Which part of ‘This man engaged in evil, criminal behaviour for which I fervently hope he will be justly punished.’ did you not understand?
He could also comment on this one.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/7551503.stm
Steve Horgan, the bit I don’t understand is what efforts were made by Conservatives in Watford and nationally to respond to the original accusations of harrassment and root it out for themselves.
Why has it taken 3 years for the perpetrator of only half of the incidents to be discovered?
Condemning with hindsight is overly-complacent and makes those who were in the position to take precautionary and/or preventative action morally complict.
Such an example bodes ill for any future Conservative government.
Whether deliberately or not Steve Horgan is missing the point.
You have said clearly that you deplore Oakley’s actions, which I for one am more than happy to accept. But the silence from the Conservative party, and implication of ‘nothing to do with us’.
To the best of my knowledge Oakley’s actions are unprecedented in a British politician from a mainstream party.
They were all carried out while he held a position of responsibility in the Conservative party – parliamentary candidate or general election campaign manager. The Conservatives were certainly the intended beneficiaries of his actions. In such circumstances the official silence – no regret, no sympathy with victims, no announcement of an inquiry – is scandalous.
I think it needs to be added that the moral complicity turns into legal complicty if knowledge of the behaviour can be proven – which is conspiracy.
Depending on how seriously you care to take the actual incidents you could then make a case for anything from a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice to undermining the system of government – which is treason – and could be indictable against the Conservative party heirarchy.
Either way, the impact of hate crimes should not be underestimated by politicians, as David Cameron’s unresponsiveness shows he does.
Steve, surely you would, in an ideal world, prefer Cameron to come out and say something similar to what you said in your first sentence? If only for your own peace of mind and pride in your party. That is the only thing at issue in the Telegraph piece.
I also don’t think it’s particularly anti-Tory to suggest there is a real question mark over whether Oakely had help or tacit approval – as there would be for a similar non-political scenario. Shorn of its political connotations, hese were criminal offences committed over three years by someone with close working associates whose daily task it was to assess the status quo that the guilty party was trying to influence – and they supposedly *never* tumbled to what he was up to?
The Telegraph commentator wrote: “Oakley himself pledged to win the key marginal for his party using “99 per cent perspiration and 10 per cent inspiration”. But even so alarm bells did not begin to ring.”
What are we expected to learn from this? That PPCs who indulge in hyperbole should not be trusted? Well that’s all of them finished, isn’t it.
Oakley’s appointment as PPC should be considered as a minor embarassment for the Conservatives. They just picked a bad one that looked good on the surface, as you do with fruit at the green grocers. The profound embarassment is that the Conservative party had many months or years to spot the bad apple and failed.
I am happy to give the Conservative party a bit of time before they comment. It is difficult to believe that Oakley acted alone, so we need to give the Conservatives a period to put their Watford organisation in order. But a response and an official apology is required.
The official Tory (non)reaction to this case just reinforces all that is bad in the way they see the World.I’m not surprised – sad but true.